So she's miserable.

I'm leaning toward not doing the EEG.  I think the quivers might just be a tic.  She was tired on the days when it happened, well rested yesterday, and no tic. 

While an EEG might make us feel better by ruling some stuff out, I'm not sure they can do one while she's teething and miserable without sedating her, and we're not willing to have her sedated for it.

One of the justifications for the EEG being done soon/immediately was that the eye quiver was happening more and more often, but then yesterday it didn't happen at all.

I dunno.  I for one am getting weary of all the medical interventions and intrusions for these kids, and don't want to do anything that's not absolutely necessary.

I've been watching videos of nystagmus and can't find one that looks like Elizabeth.  Same for spasmus nutans, though.  That means it's epileptic, possibly, or maybe just something she can do consciously.  Some people can shake their eyes.

I guess I'm calling the neuro back today to discuss it again.  I'm sure she'll be thrilled.  I really wasn't too impressed with her.

It could be that it was "just one of those things" that kids go through as they grow.

Sure, check with the doc, but like they say, if you hear hoofbeats, don't automatically assume it's from a zebra, because it's probably a horse.

My wife is pretty adamant about the EEG now, but I think she's panicked.  I'm not convinced that the trauma of the test is outweighed by the "rule out" that it may or may not provide.

Another thing to consider - suppose you do diagnose something with an EEG.  Is there any treatment that you would actually start immediately?  Or would treatment likely wait till she's older?  B/c if treatment would wait, the EEG can wait too.

I'm not sure how soon they could start anti-convulsants, but I am opposed to anti-convulsants anyway.

My wife is on the fence about them.  Being a psych nurse, she should know better.  We would basically be throwing Elizabeth's intellectual and emotional development in the garbage.

Since the tremors are gone for now, so too is my desire to intervene whatsoever.

+1 for no intervention to prevent something that happened ONCE.

There's an awful tendency to medicate any percieved problem, and then never remove the medication, whether there's a REAL problem or not.

Watch and wait. No need for any testing or intervention unless it is clearly called for.

It sounds like you wouldn't treat it anyway.  Skip the EEG, even if the tremors come back, unless the information would cause a definite change in how you care for her.

What's traumatic about an EEG? I thought they just put a bunch of things on your head and measured? That *could* be scary, but it could also be a bit of fun if you're a baby and in a good mood.

They use an abrasive gel to scratch off layers of skin and hair in a very tight area for each of dozens of electrodes before gluing them down to the baby's head.

In some cases they use a knit cap with the electrodes pre-placed and some gel, but with her thick hair I doubt they'd go that route.

It could be QUITE traumatic.

As purple said, if we're not going to treat, why test? 

My wife might disagree b/c she'd feel better ruling out epilepsy.

I don't know with her current temperament if we could even do that anyway, though.

It happened about a half dozen times, Hubble, for a span of 3 days.

Ever since I stopped crib-training her and put her back in her swing at night, it hasn't recurred.

Could be coincidence.

> she'd feel better ruling out epilepsy.

Actually she's in training to become a zombie. In no time at all she'll be crawling around the living room, her eyes will roll back into her head, and she'll groan "brainnnzzz".

One reason for excessive health care costs is hypocondriacs!

Hypocondriacs, and the Medico's that perscribe for them.